The horizontal line represents the person’s life.1635 - born1662 - “there are many things
in it, which, if he were to write again, he would not say;
some, which shew his youth, and want of due consideration; others, which he yielded too far, in hopes of gaining the dissenting parties to the church of England”1658 - “Labyrinthus Cantuariensis, or, Dr. Laud’s
Labyrinth, by T. C”1664 - “A rational account of the grounds of
the Protestant Religion; being a vindication of the lord
archbishop of Canterbury’s relation of a conference”1679 - “A Letter shewing that
bishops are not to be judges in parliament in cases capital”1699 - died

Stillingfleet, Edward

, one of the most learned
prelates of the seventeenth century, was the seventh son
of Samuel Stillingfleet, gent, descended from the ancient
family of the StillingBeets of Stillingfleet, about four miles
from York. His mother was Susanna, the daughter of
Edward Norris, of Petworth, in Sussex,gent. He was
born at Cranbourne in Dorsetshire, April 17, 1635, and
educated at the grammar-school of that place by Mr. Thomas Garden, a man of eminence in his profession. He
continued at this school until, being intended for the university, he was removed to Ringwood in Hampshire, that
he might have a chance for one of Lynne’s exhibitions, who
was the founder of that school.

Having succeeded in this, he was entered in Michaelmas
1648, of St. John’s college, Cambridge, and in the beginning of November was admitted a scholar of the house,
on the nomination of the earl of Salisbury. It may readily
be believed that his application and progress in his studies
were of no common kind, as he was so soon to give public
proofs of both. He took his bachelor’s degree in 1652,
and was now so much esteemed by his society, that at the
| very next election he was chosen into a fellowship, and
admitted March 31, lf-53. While bachelor, he was appointed tripos, and was much applauded for his speech on
that occasion, which was “witty and inoffensive,” a character not often given to those compositions.

About 1654 he left the university to accept the invitation of sir Roger Burgoyne, who wished him to reside with
him at his seat at Wroxhall, in Warwickshire He had
been recommended by Dr. Hainan, one of the fellows 01 his
college, but in what capacity, whether as chaplain or companion, does not appear. Sir Roger was a man of piety
and learning, and became afterwards a very kind friend
and patron to Mr. Stillingfleet, yet parted with him very
readily next year, when he was invited to Nottingham to
be tutor to the hon. Francis Pierrepoint, esq. brother to the
marquis of Dorchester. In 1656 he completed his master’s
degree, and the following year left Nottingham, and went
again to Wroxfoail, where his patron, sir Roger Burgoyne,
presented him to the living of Sutton, in Bedfordshire.
Before institution he received orders at the hands of Dr.
Brownrig, the ejected bishop of Exeter.

While at Nottingham, as tutor to Mr. Pierrepoint, he
composed his first publication, and printed it in 1659, under the title of “Irenicum, a weapon-salve for the church’s
wounds, or the divine right of particular forms of churchgovernment discussed and examined according to the principles of the law of nature; the positive laws of God; the
practice of the apostles; and the primitive church; and the
judgment of reformed divines, whereby a foundation is
laid for the church’s peace, and the accommodation of our
present differences.” As this was an attempt to promote
the return of the non-conformists to the church, and consequently implied some concessions which were irreconcilable with the divine right of episcopacy, for which the
adherents of the church contended, and yet not enough to
please either presbyterians or independents, the author
had not the satisfaction of meeting with full credit even for
his intentions; and upon more mature consideration, he
himself thought his labour in vain, and did not scruple
afterwards to say of his work, that “there are many things
in it, which, if he were to write again, he would not say;
some, which shew his youth, and want of due consideration; others, which he yielded too far, in hopes of gaining the dissenting parties to the church of England.” In
| 1662 he reprinted this work; with the addition of a discourse “concerning the power of Excommunication in a
Christian Church” in which he attempts to prove, that
“the church is a distinct society from the state, and has
divers rights and privileges of its own, particularly that it
has a power of censuring offenders, resulting from its constitution as a Christian society; and that these rights of
the church cannot be alienated to the state, after their
being united, in a Christian country.”

Whatever difference of opinion there was respecting
some of the positions laid down in this work, there was
one point in which all agreed, that it exhibited a fund of
learning, and an extent of reading and research far beyond
what could have been expected in a young man of twenty-­four years of age, and was, as we shall soon find, mistaken
for the production of a man of full years and established
fame.

At Sutton, while he performed all the duties of a diligent
and faithful pastor, he adhered closely to his studies, and
in 1662, produced his “Origines Sacræ; or a rational account of the ChristianFaith, as to the truth and divine authority of the Scriptures, and the matters therein contained,”
4to. The highest compliment paid him in consequence of
this very learned work, was at a visitation, when bishop
Sanderson, his diocesan, hearing his name called over,
asked him if he was any relation to the great Stillingfleet,
author of the Origines Sacræ? When modestly informed
that he was the very man, the bishop welcomed him with
great cordiality, and said, that “he expected rather to
have seen one as considerable for his years as he had already shewn himself for his learning.” This work has
indeed been always justly esteemed one of the ablest defences of revealed religion that had then appeared in any
language. It was republished by Dr. Bentley in 1709,
with “Part of another book upon the same subject, written in 1697, from the author’s own manuscript,” folio.
Bishop Sanderson, as a special mark of his respect, granted
the author a licence to preach throughout his diocese; and
Henchman, bishop of London, conceived so high an opinion of his talents, that he employed him to write a vindication of archbishop Laud’s conference with Fisher, the
Jesuit. Laud’s conference had been attacked in a publication entitled “Labyrinthus Cantuariensis, or, Dr. Laud’s
Labyrinth, by T. C.” said to have been printed at Paris,
| in 1658, but which did not appear till 1663. Stillingfleet’s
answer was entitled “A rational account of the grounds of
the Protestant Religion; being a vindication of the lord
archbishop of Canterbury’s relation of a conference,” &c.
Lond. 1664, fol. Such was his readiness in composition,
that he is reported to have sent to the press six or seven
sheets a week of this volume, which Dr. Tillotson said he
“found in every part answerable to its title, a rational account.”

The country was now no longer thought a proper field
for the exertions of one who had already shown himself so
able a champion for his church and nation. His first advance to London was in consequence of his being appointed
preacher to the Rolls chapel, by sir Harbottle Grimston;
and in Jan. 1665 he was presented by Thomas, earl of
Southampton, to the living of St. Andrew’s, Holborn.
With this he kept his preachership at the Rolls, and was
at the same time afternoon lecturer at the Temple church,
which procured him the esteem and friendship of many
eminent men in the law, particularly sir Matthew Hale,
and lord chief justice Vaughan. Nor were his discourses
less adapted to the common understanding. The eminent
non-conformist, Matthew Henry, was often his auditor and
admirer.

In February 1667, he was collated by bishop Henchman
to the prebend of Islington, in the church of St. Paul’s.
Having in 1663 taken his degree of B. D. he commenced
D. D. in 1668, at which time he kept the public act with
great applause. He was also king’s chaplain,*

*

While chaplain to the king, Charles
II. his majesty asked him, “How it
came about, that he always read his
sermons before him, when, he was informed, he always preached without
book elsewhere?” He told the king,
that “the awe of so noble an audience,
where he saw nothing that was not
greatly superior to him; but chiefly,
the seeing before him so great and wise
a prince, made him afraid to trust
himself.” With this answer, which,
bowever, became the courtier rather
than the divine, and we trust has been
heightened in the relation, the king was
very well contented. “But pray,”
says Stillingfleet, “will your majesty
give me leave to ask you a question
too? Why you read your speeches,
when you can have none of the same
reasons?” “Why truly, doctor,” says
the king, “your question is a very
pertinent one, and so will be my answer. I have asked them so often and
for so much money, that I am ashamed
to look them in the face.” Richardsoniana, p. 89.

and in
1670 his majesty bestowed on him the place of canon residentiary of St. Paul’s. In Oct. 1672 he exchanged his
prebend of Islington for that of Newington, in the same
church. These preferments were succeeded, in 1677, by
| the archdeaconry of London, and in Jan. 1678, by the
deanry of St. Paul’s.

To all these he had recommended himself by the ability
with which he carried on controversies with various enemies
to the established religion. In 1669 he had published
some sermons, one of which, “on the reason of Christ’s
suffering for us,” involved him in a controversy with the
Socinians, and he was engaged soon after in other controversies with the popish writers, with the deists, and with
the separatists. It would be unnecessary to give the titles
of the pamphlets he wrote against all these parties, as they
are now to be found in the edition of his collected works.
Successful as he was against these opponents, and few
writers in his time were more so, he was not a lover of controversy, and seldom could be prevailed upon to engage
in it, but in consequence of such provocation as he thought
it would have been a desertion of his post, if he had neglected to notice.

About 1679 Dr. Stillingfleet turned his thoughts to a
subject apparently foreign to his usual pursuits, but in
which he displayed equal ability. This was the question
as to the right of bishops to vote in capital cases, and was
occasioned by the prosecution of Thomas Osborne, earl of
Danby. Among others who contested that right, was Denzil lord Holies, who published “A Letter shewing that
bishops are not to be judges in parliament in cases capital,” 1679, 4to. In answer to this, Dr. Stillingfleet published “The grand question concerning the bishop’s right
to vote in parliament in cases capital, stated and argued
from the parliament rolls and the history of former times,
with an inquiry into their peerage, and the three estates
in parliament.” Bishop Burnet observes that in this Stillingfleet gave a proof of his being able to make himself
master of any argument which he undertook, and discovered more skill and exactness in judging this matter than
all who had gone before him. Burnet adds that in the
opinion of all impartial men he put an end to the controversy.

In 1685, he published his “Origines Britannicæ,” or
the antiquities of British Churches, a work of great learning, and in which he displayed a knowledge of antiquities,
both civil and ecclesiastical, which would almost induce
the reader to think they had been the study of his whole
life. Just before the revolution, he was summoned to
|
appear before king James’s ecclesiastical commission, but had
the courage, in that critical time, to draw up a discourse
on the illegality of that commission, which was published
in 1689.

Besides his other preferments, Dr. Stillingfleet was canon of the twelfth stall in the church of Canterbury, and
prolocutor of the lower house of convocation for many years,
in the reigns of Charles II. and James 11. At the revolution he was advanced to the bishopric of Worcester, and
consecrated Oct. 13, 1689, and in this station conducted
himself in a very exemplary manner, and delivered some
excellent charges to his clergy, which were afterwards
published among his “Ecclesiastical Cases.” In the House
of Lords he is said to have appeared to much advantage; but
two only of his speeches are upon record, one on the case
of visitation of colleges, occasioned by a dispute between
Dr. Trelawney, bishop of Exeter, as visitor of Exeter college, and Dr. Bury, the rector of that college; and the
other on the case of commendams.

Soon after his promotion to the see of Worcester, he was
appointed one of the commissioners for reviewing the
liturgy, and his opinion was highly valued by his brethren.
The last controversy in which he had any concern, was
with the celebrated Locke, who, having laid down some
principles in his “Essay on Human Understanding,” which
seemed to the bishop to strike at the mysteries of revealed
religion, fell on that account under his lordship’s cognizance.
Although Dr. Stillingfleet had always had the reputation of
coming off with triumph in all his controversies, in this he
was supposed to be not successful; and some have gone
so far as to conjecture, that being pressed with clearer and
closer reasoning by Locke, than he had been accustomed
to from his other adversaries, it created in him a chagrin
which shortened his life. There is, however, no occasion
for a supposition so extravagant. He had been subject to
the gout near twenty years, and it having fixed in his
stomach, proved fatal to him. He died at his house in
Park-street, Westminster, March 27, 1699. His biographer describes his person as tall, graceful, and well-proportioned; his countenance comely, fresh, and awful.
“His apprehension was quick and sagacious, his judgment
exact and profound, and his memory very tenacious so
that, considering how intensely he studied, and how he
read every thing, it is easy to imagine him, what he really
| was, one of the most universal scholars that ever lived.”
His body was carried for interment to Worcester cathedral,
after which an elegant monument was erected over him,
with an inscription written by Dr. Bentley, who had been
his chaplain. This gives a noble and yet just idea of the
man, and affords good authority for many particulars recorded of his life.

His writings were all collected, and reprinted in 1710,
in 6 vols. folio. The first contains, 1. “Fifty Sermons,
preached on several occasions,” with the author’s life. The
second, 2. “Origines Sacræ” 3 “Letter to a Deist,”
written, as he tells us in the preface, for the satisfaction
of a particular person, who owned the Being and Providence of God, but expressed a mean esteem of the scriptures and the Christian religion. 4. “Irenicum: the Unreasonableness of Separation, or an impartial account of
the history, nature, and pleas of the present Separation
from the Communion of the Church of England.” The
third volume contains, 5. “Origines Britannicæ, or the
Antiquities of the British Churches;” 6. “Two Discourses
concerning the Doctrine of Christ’s Satisfaction, against
the Socinians.” 7. “Vindication of the Doctrine of the
Trinity,” in which he animadverts upon some passages in
Mr. Locke’s Essay. 8. “Answers to two Letters,” published by Mr. Locke. 9. “Ecclesiastical cases relating to
the duties and rights of the Parochial Clergy,” a charge.
10. “Concerning Bonds of resignation of Benefices.” 11.
“The Foundation of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and as it
regards the legal supremacy.” 12. “The grand question
concerning the Bishops’ right to vote in Parliament in
cases capital.” 13. “Two speeches in Parliament.” 14.
“Of the true Antiquity of London.” 15. “Concerning
the Unreasonableness of a new Separation, on account of
the oaths to King William and Queen Mary.” 16. “A
Vindication of their Majesties authorities to fill the sees of
deprived Bishops.” 17. “An Answer to the Paper delivered by Mr. Ashton, at his execution, to sir Francis
Child, Sheriff of London, with the Paper itself.” The
fourth, fifth, and sixth volumes contain, 18. Pieces written against the Church of Rome, in controversy with
Cressy, Sargeant, and other Popish advocates.

“When I was a young man,” says the present venerable bishop of Llandaff, “I had formed a mean opinion of
the reasoniog faculties of bishop Stillingfleet, from
|
reading Mr. Locke’s Letter and two replies to him but a better acquaintance with the bishop’s works has convinced me
that my opinion was ill-founded. Though no match for Mr.
Locke in strength and acuteness of argument, yet his
`Origines Sacræ,' and other works, show him to have been
not merely a searcher into ecclesiastical antiquities, but a
sound divine and a good reasoner.” This confession from
one, perhaps a little more latitudinarian than our author
in some important points, has probably contributed to revive an attention to Stillingfleet’s works, which have accordingly risen very highly in value. Indeed if we consider the variety of subjects on which he wrote, and wrote
with acknowledged skill and with elegance of style, and
the early fame he acquired and uniformly preserved, it will
not be thought too much to rank him in the first class of
learned men of the seventeenth century. While he was
rector of Sutton, he married a daughter of William Dobyns, a Gloucestershire gentleman, who lived not long
with him; yet had two daughters who died in their infancy,
and one son, Dr. Edward Stillingfleet, afterwards rector
of Wood-Norton in Norfolk. Then he married a daughter
of sir Nicholas Pedley of Huntingdon, Serjeant at law,
who lived with him almost all his life, and brought him
seven children, of whom two only survived him; James
rector of Hartlebury and canon of Windsor, and Anne,
married afterwards to Humphrey Tyshe, of Gray’s-Inn,
esq. His grandson is the subject of the next article. 1

This text has been generated using commercial OCR software,
and there are still many problems; it is slowly getting better
over time.
The text was scanned and OCRd several times, and
a majority version of each line of text was chosen.
Please don't reuse the content
(e.g. do not post to wikipedia)
without asking liam
at holoweb dot net first (mention the colour of your socks in the mail),
because I am still working on fixing errors.
Thanks!